SF support for an illegal IRA war in NI Vs their protest at an illegal war in Iraq-is it hypocrisy?

Blub2k4

Rock Climber wrote:

yeah and there are many Sinn Féin supporters who can protest an illegal war in Iraq , yet support and glorify an illegal IRA war in Northern Ireland...

Imagine that!

Or maybe just that they support the rights of the small man when confronted by a state or states acting illegally?
The two are perfectly compatible with each other.

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

The two are perfectly compatible with each other.

Are you trying to say that supporting an illegal war in Northern Ireland and protesting against an illegal war in Iraq is not some form of hypocrisy?
Because I dont see how it couldnt be.

Blub2k4

Earthman wrote:

Are you trying to say that supporting an illegal war in Northern Ireland and protesting against an illegal war in Iraq is not some form of hypocrisy?
Because I dont see how it couldnt be.

Read what I said, I dont think it can be much clearer, you're being a little disingenious.
In both cases it is a protest against an occupation, by the British, both view points are compatible.

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

Read what I said, I dont think it can be much clearer, you're being a little disingenious.
In both cases it is a protest against an occupation, by the British, both view points are compatible.

Well I took the post that you were replying to as saying it was hypocrisy-so is it?
And if not, how not?

Rock Climber

Blub2k4 wrote:

Or maybe just that they support the rights of the small man when confronted by a state or states acting illegally?
The two are perfectly compatible with each other.

they protested the war in Iraq saying it was illegal before during and after the war.They were out on the streets saying this.
Yet they do the opposite with the illegal IRA war in Northern Ireland.
Thats hypocrisy.

Blub2k4

Earthman wrote:

Well I took the post that you were replying to as saying it was hypocrisy-so is it?
And if not, how not?

I dont think it is hypocritical in any way, you are not reading what I am writing, I already explained why I dont think it to be hypocritical and why I think the viewpoints are compatible.

Me wrote:

Or maybe just that they support the rights of the small man when confronted by a state or states acting illegally?

Me wrote:

In both cases it is a protest against an occupation, by the British, both view points are compatible.

So where is the difficulty with comprehension stemming from?

Lemming

Blub2k4 wrote:

I dont think it is hypocritical in any way, you are not reading what I am writing, I already explained why I dont think it to be hypocritical and why I think the viewpoints are compatible.

The viewpoints are not compatible for one simple reason. These people then go and support the 'opposite side' engaged in the illegal "war" in N.Ireland. They are not giving tacit support & comfort to the opposing side in the Gulf. Nor, I suspect, would they be terribly inclined to do so if the opportunity arose.

Rock Climber

Blub2k4 wrote:

So where is the difficulty with comprehension stemming from?

Do you think that supporting an illegal war in one place and protesting it in another is not hypocrisy?
It is.

Blub2k4

Rock Climber wrote:

they protested the war in Iraq saying it was illegal before during and after the war.They were out on the streets saying this.
Yet they do the opposite with the illegal IRA war in Northern Ireland.
Thats hypocrisy.

Rock Climber wrote:

yeah and there are many Sinn Féin supporters

Rock Climber wrote:

they protested the war in Iraq

I am speaking for myself in this case obviously but attempting to give an answer as to why I can hold what appear to you to be opposing viewpoints(from your point of view) and why I dont find these viewpoints to be imcompatible or hypocritical.

Blub2k4

Lemming wrote:

The viewpoints are not compatible for one simple reason. These people then go and support the 'opposite side' engaged in the illegal "war" in N.Ireland. They are not giving tacit support & comfort to the opposing side in the Gulf. Nor, I suspect, would they be terribly inclined to do so if the opportunity arose.

Personally I have no problem with supporting the insurgency in Iraq, you're making a lot of assumptions about "them". :rolleyes:

Blub2k4

Rock Climber wrote:

Do you think that supporting an illegal war in one place and protesting it in another is not hypocrisy?
It is.

It is down to viewpoints, what is a legal war exactly?
Does state involvement confer legitimacy on a war?
In the framework of my viewpoint as already outlined I dont consider it to be hypocritical.

Lemming

Blub2k4 wrote:

Personally I have no problem with supporting the insurgency in Iraq, you're making a lot of assumptions about "them". :rolleyes:

So .... you would ally yourself with Al Queada then? They are operating amongst the insurgents ....

Blub2k4

Lemming wrote:

So .... you would ally yourself with Al Queada then? They are operating amongst the insurgents ....

Wow pathetic really.
Al-Qaeida are operating among the insurgents, recently.
I support the Iraqi peoples right to defend their country against an illegal occupation, the fact that Al-Qaeida are part of that insurgency is a secondary issue, their reasons are possibly misguided but the underlying principle of defending Iraq is correct in my opinion.
I do not support Al-qaeida, to be honest I have difficulty even taking the name "al qaeida" seriously and is on a par with attempting to label me as something that fits a neat box that you have that does not really exist.
I have lived in Saudi Arabia and dont have a problem with arabs.

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

I am speaking for myself in this case obviously but attempting to give an answer as to why I can hold what appear to you to be opposing viewpoints(from your point of view) and why I dont find these viewpoints to be imcompatible or hypocritical.

You are avoiding the question.
Sinn Féin officially protested against the illegal war in Iraq, yet officially condone an illegal IRA war in Northern Ireland-how is that not hypocracy on their part? Do you agree that it is?

I'm splitting this off topic sideline into a new thread by the way including this post.

mycroft

Earthman wrote:

You are avoiding the question.
Sinn Féin officially protested against the illegal war in Iraq, yet officially condone an illegal IRA war in Northern Ireland-how is that not hypocracy on their part? Do you agree that it is?

I'm splitting this off topic sideline into a new thread by the way including this post.
(the original thread will close for abut a minute while I do this)

Not to mention SF meekly heading up to meet Bush during the antiwar protests.

bonkey

Blub2k4 wrote:

In both cases it is a protest against an occupation, by the British, both view points are compatible.

Well given that the "occupation" of Ireland by the British predates the discovery of the Americas by Western European nations, I assume you would then concede that the lack of SF condemning that particular occupation is hypocritical?

Indeed, they would appear to support the occupation of the US by Wstern-European emigrants, as they use the country as a base of moral and financial support, rather than exhorting the occupiers to flock off back to where they came from and give the country back to the people who owned it in the first place.

So maybe you're right, and there's no hypocracy in the Iraq / NI comparison because the're both occupations. Kinda highlights an even deeper hypocracy if thats the case, though....wouldn't you agree?

jc

Blub2k4

Earthman wrote:

You are avoiding the question.
Sinn Féin officially protested against the illegal war in Iraq, yet officially condone an illegal IRA war in Northern Ireland-how is that not hypocracy on their part? Do you agree that it is?

I'm splitting this off topic sideline into a new thread by the way including this post.

As previously mentioned if SF are thinking along the lines of what I mentioned as being my viewpoint then I dont see it as being hypocritical.
If you anyalyse it as you have chosen to then you could come to this conclusion, with this point I agree while disagreeing totally with your basis for reasoning.

Blub2k4

bonkey wrote:

Well given that the "occupation" of Ireland by the British predates the discovery of the Americas by Western European nations, I assume you would then concede that the lack of SF condemning that particular occupation is hypocritical?

Indeed, they would appear to support the occupation of the US by Wstern-European emigrants, as they use the country as a base of moral and financial support, rather than exhorting the occupiers to flock off back to where they came from and give the country back to the people who owned it in the first place.

So maybe you're right, and there's no hypocracy in the Iraq / NI comparison because the're both occupations. Kinda highlights an even deeper hypocracy if thats the case, though....wouldn't you agree?

jc

Is there a large insurgent population in the states fighting a war to have their rights recognised? I think you have constructed a strawman.

A Dub in Glasgo

There is hypocrisy everywhere and on this board as well.

It is hypocritical of people to condemn or protest about one illegal war and then fully support another illegal war which has slaughtered many many more innocent men women and children. Their condemnations and rank hysteria about condemning the former rings very hollow indeed when their support for the latter is taken into account.

Edit:

I have just noticed the split in the thread. I think the title is far too narrow. It can easily be:

People who condemn an illegal war in NI v their support of an illegal war in Iraq - is it hypocrisy?

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

As previously mentioned if SF are thinking along the lines of what I mentioned as being my viewpoint then I dont see it as being hypocritical.
If you anyalyse it as you have chosen to then you could come to this conclusion, with this point I agree while disagreeing totally with your basis for reasoning.

Well if thats their reasoning, why do they object to the invasion as an illegal war? when the IRA campaign that they support was an illegal war.

You seem to be skipping the war and hopping onto the occupation to avoid addressing the issue raised here.

Blub2k4

Earthman wrote:

Well if thats their reasoning, why do they object to the invasion as an illegal war? when the IRA campaign that they support was an illegal war.

You seem to be skipping the war and hopping onto the occupation to avoid addressing the issue raised here.

I think you are attempting to bring it down to semantics which is why I am "hopping" to the occupation, you base your argument on "illegal war" I am choosing to see the implications a bit wider.
I dont see it as hypocrisy.
<edit> I suppose what I have neglected to mention is the subjectivity which allows me to call the northern situation a legitimate struggle for freedom as opposed to your slant which is to name it an illegal war, is this distinction not the basis of the problem here in Ireland?

mycroft

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

There is hypocrisy everywhere and on this board as well.

It is hypocritical of people to condemn or protest about one illegal war and then fully support another illegal war which has slaughtered many many more innocent men women and children. Their condemnations and rank hysteria about condemning the former rings very hollow indeed when their support for the latter is taken into account.

Edit:

I have just noticed the split in the thread. I think the title is far too narrow. It can easily be:

People who condemn an illegal war in NI v their support of an illegal war in Iraq - is it hypocrisy?

The death toil in Iraq is higher than NI, and the IRA have an impressive civilan casualties list on their very bloody hands.

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

I think you are attempting to bring it down to semantics which is why I am "hopping" to the occupation, you base your argument on "illegal war" I am choosing to see the implications a bit wider.

And in the process it seems conveniently sidestepping the hypocrisy issue which I questioned on the war.
Thats not what I asked you to do.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

It is hypocritical of people to condemn or protest about one illegal war and then fully support another illegal war which has slaughtered many many more innocent men women and children. Their condemnations and rank hysteria about condemning the former rings very hollow indeed when their support for the latter is taken into account.

Who on this thread is being a hypocrite?
I've never tacitly supported the Iraq war,I've left my mind open and questioned anything that I thought needed questioning on both sides as far as I can remember, even the illegality of the war it self at all as it was not ever determined as illegal(though in spirit it always was).

So who is being hypocritical in discussing this here specifically?
Sinn Féin on the other hand are firmly in the camp of declaring the Iraq war as illegal, yet they supported a transparently and fully determined illegal war.
Thats definitely hypocrisy.

Blub2k4

Earthman wrote:

And in the process it seems conveniently sidestepping the hypocrisy issue which I questioned on the war.
Thats not what I asked you to do.
Who on this thread is being a hypocrite?
I've never tacitly supported the Iraq war,I've left my mind open and questioned anything that I thought needed questioning on both sides as far as I can remember, even the illegality of the war it self at all as it was not ever determined as illegal(though in spirit it always was).

So who is being hypocritical in discussing this here specifically?
Sinn Féin on the other hand are firmly in the camp of declaring the Iraq war as illegal, yet they supported a transparently and fully determined illegal war.
Thats definitely hypocrisy.

SO exactly how many times do I have to write that I do not think it is hypocritical?

mycroft

Earthman wrote:

So who is being hypocritical in discussing this here specifically?
Sinn Féin on the other hand are firmly in the camp of declaring the Iraq war as illegal, yet they supported a transparently and fully determined illegal war.
Thats definitely hypocrisy.

And lets no forgot roaming up to the North for a photo op with Bush at the height of the protests......

Thats my favourite bit.

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

SO exactly how many times do I have to write that I do not think it is hypocritical?

I'm asking you to explain why,rather than sidestyep into an argument about occupation.
The question was about an illegal war and not an occupation.
SF officially were out protesting the impending illegal war before it even happened,there was no illegal occupation then.
So address the question please or agree to disagree

Drummer

Similarly - the English and Irish governement taking a stance against an illegal war in the Ni, yet supporting and illegal war in Iraq.

Why don't the IRA / Sinn Féin put it to the people of the island. Why not be democratic. Ask the people if we want them to continue fighting on our behalf ?!

We could even have a representative outcome. So if 20% of people want the war to continue, they only carry on with it 20% of the time. Same way we vote for the dail members.

A Dub in Glasgo

Earthman wrote:

Who on this thread is being a hypocrite?

Ah... I never said this thread. I said this board (boards.ie).

I've never tacitly supported the Iraq war,I've left my mind open and questioned anything that I thought needed questioning on both sides as far as I can remember, even the illegality of the war it self at all as it was not ever determined as illegal(though in spirit it always was).

So who is being hypocritical in discussing this here specifically?
Sinn Féin on the other hand are firmly in the camp of declaring the Iraq war as illegal, yet they supported a transparently and fully determined illegal war.
Thats definitely hypocrisy.

Anybody who disagrees with the war in NI and yet agrees with the war in Iraq is a hypocrite. A non-hypocrite would oppose both wars or support both wars. The Irish government are hypocrites and they are actively helping with the logistics of one war and the facilities could easily have been called legitimate targets if Iraq wanted to strike in the Republic.

mycroft

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Ah... I never said this thread. I said this board (boards.ie).

Boards.ie has a policy on the Iraq war???

Anybody who disagrees with the war in NI and yet agrees with the war in Iraq is a hypocrite. A non-hypocrite would oppose both wars or support both wars. The Irish government are hypocrites and they are actively helping with the logistics of one war and the facilities could easily have been called legitimate targets if Iraq wanted to strike in the Republic.

And SF are hyprocrits for condemning the war but photo oping with Bush.

Out of curiousity which war in Iraq, can you be aganist the invasion, and the insurections attacks on civilian targets?

A Dub in Glasgo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Ah... I never said this thread. I said this board (boards.ie).

It's irrelevant here then Dub as we are discussing SF's stance and not anybody elses,unless the hypocrites you have in mind are here discussing the point like we are.

Blub2k4

Earthman wrote:

The question was about an illegal war and not an occupation.
SF officially were out protesting the impending illegal war before it even happened,there was no illegal occupation then.
So address the question please or agree to disagree

It's interesting and very neat how you can disconnect an illegal war from an occupation. So are you saying that campaigning against an illegal war supposed that there would be no illegal occupation following it?
In any case I did already choose to disagree.

Me wrote:

If you anyalyse it as you have chosen to then you could come to this conclusion, with this point I agree while disagreeing totally with your basis for reasoning.